^ i think both you and DR are not very far apart codie.
Peace bro ravage
First of all the video clip has been posted out of context. Dr. Israr says specifically "is ke pass" which implies as bro TLK suggested that the reason for the ayat to be revealed was because of such and such.
The question to ask however, is not whether Sayyiduna Ali (RA) was too drunk to recite or not, but to ask whether he used to drink at all. What is your belief regarding the consumption of alcohol by the Ahl-al-Bait before the instruction of it's prohibition? Then how does it fit with your understanding of infallibility of certain persons? (May blessings of Allah (SWT) be on them all).
If you claim that despite being drunk Ali (RA) would not have made such a critical error in recitation then are you suggesting that alcohol cannot hinder members of Ahl-al-Bait and if so then why was it made haram for everyone including Ahl-Al-Bait (May Allah (SWT) be pleased with all of them)?
Im not bound to accept this as history to begin with. If anything I would think that someone as good as Ali would be one of the 'many' who gave up alcohol on the politer suggestion of the prophet and not the intransigent ones characterized as "jin ki ghutti mai sharab mili thi".
Usually, especially when talking about contentious personalities, people add the caveat that Tirmizi is not as reliable as sahih bukhari and sahih muslim, which did not include this hadis.
It is the intention of a few, which poisons the masses.
Let us not cause a rift between Muslims, because some people like to take things a little too far with their emotions, instead of using their heads.
We have bigger problems to currently worry about. Do we not?
We dont worry about bigger problems, unfortunately. Zakir Naik is virtually persona non grata for shias after his yazid comments, and my feeling is so will this guy be. Therefore it is important to confront and talk about this rather than hide from it.
MaMooli I lost my temper because 2 muharrams I spent trying to appraise the 12er communities of 3 cities of N. America the qualities of sahaba [even the ones they consider good and even the ones who died in prophet's time] but was met with indifference and disapproval of the "resident alim" e.g if i spoke of bravery of musab b umair ,knowledge of Muadh b jabal or love of Khuzaiymah for the Prophet , it was quickly followed by the Alim/or some other dude clarifying that Ali was far superior in all these qualities.Obviously who would deny this claim ...even every reasonable sunni would agree.But why does that have to emphasized at this point ? do the qualities of Ali diminish in any way if other sahaba are praised ?
I know that certain sahaba in 12er rijal books have been highly praised but that is hardly common knowledge amongst general 12er [even the knowledagable ones]. Furthermore there is a deafing silence on the sacrfices of sahaba for islam.Even from a shia perspective e.g there is no majlis on deaths of abu dharr and ammar , even though every 12er who dies get a "majalis" to his name.The only 'sahaba who seem to be remembered are habib b mazahir and hurr b yazid that too because there have to be 10 majalis before ashura.It seems to me that just as the nawasib of today who claim to love Ali but neglect him so much to erase him from the popular memory of muslims the 12ers try to do the same to the other sahaba.make them look so insignificant as if their contribution to islam was negligible
Also I have yet to find one general view of 12er scholars regarding sahaba some like kashahi highly regard as many as 12, kulyani only thinks 3 or 4 were good. some later scholars like jafar subhani say as many as 40 were good ones.
Clearly someone who has spent time with shias. That is indeed the mindset, especially if they know you're a sunni interested in shia beliefs they will try to overwhelm your senses with Ali's praises.
The problem is DR that you must have done this during Muharram, when there are visiting molvies who's profession it is to get money and travel to exotic places like america and bradford to do the 10 majalis. They are professional 'zakirs', and while they appear to be proper aalims, usually they are very specialised to delivering those speeches. And in order to be successful you dont have to aim to deliver very intellectual speeches either, hucksterism will get you very, very far.
I've suggested this to you before, it is a much better idea to try to get as much as possible from the websites of people like sistani or khamenei. better still do something like what mooli did i.e. go to iran and study with them.
although ultimately it is very sad that you have to go to such lengths to find someone who wouldnt react like our part time muharram molvies do. And you have a very good point about the suppression of sahaba virtues much like the nawasib for ali.
however this i dont understand: what is the purpose in remembering these personalities? historical accuracy, a debt owed to them or the desire to remember them because they were narrators of ahadith?